How the Stuka and Douglas SBD Altered the Course of WW2
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 27 ส.ค. 2024
- Go to ground.news/droid to access data-driven information from around the world. Subscribe through my link for as little as $1/month or get 40% off unlimited access this month only.
Two average warplanes, one on each side of the war, both overlooked by their more glamorous brethren but both were outstanding dive bombers capable of doing what artillery or heavy bombing could not and both had a major impact on the course of WW2, one in starting it and the other at ending it. This is the story of how the Junkers Ju.87 Stuka and the Douglas SBD Dauntless Altered the Course of WW2.
To give one off tips and donations please use the following :
www.buymeacoff...
or paypal.me/curiousdroid
/ curiousdroid
This video is sponsored by ground.news/droid
Written, Researched and Presented by Paul Shillito
Images and footage: Images and footage : US Navy, Junkers GmbH
And as always a big thank you also goes out to all our Patreons :-)
Eριχθόνιος JL
Adriaan von Grobbe
Alex K
Alipasha Sadri
Andrew Gaess
Andrew Smith
Bengtstromberg
Brian Kelly
Carl Soderstrom
Charles Thacker
Collin Copfer
Daniel Armer
erik ahrsjo
Florian Müller
George Bishop II
Glenn Dickinson
inunotaisho
Jesse Postier
John & Becki Johnston
John Zelinka
Jonathan Travers
Ken Schwarz
L D
László Antal
Lorne Diebel
Mark Heslop
Matti J Malkia
Patrick M Brennan
Paul Freed
Paul Shutler
Peter Engrav
Robert Sanges
Ryan Emmenegger
SHAMIR
stefan hufenbach
Steve Ehrmann
Steve J - LakeCountySpacePort
tesaft
Tim Alberstein
Tyron Muenzer
Will Lowe
![[TH] 2024 PMSL SEA W2D5 | Fall | พลาดวันนี้ จะต้องเสียใจ](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/A5-Cuo12p6A/mqdefault.jpg)
Go to ground.news/droid to access data-driven information from around the world. Subscribe through my link for as little as $1/month or get 40% off unlimited access this month only.
You cannot do ad reads that long at the start of videos. split them up if you must. but that was ridiculous.
@@GWNHomestead I watched as you edited your comment 3 times... let me know when you're done and I will reply
I get very suspicious when many channels start plugging the same advertiser over and over, and copy is basically the same. How can we be sure Ground is worth a grain of salt?
@@GWNHomestead >"It's his channel. He can do whatever he wants!"
Yes, and his viewers are equally free to object to whatever they want, like wasting two+ minutes of a 16-minute video on a stupid ad.
@@jamesjross Sponsorblock skipped it for me. Makes modern day YT barely survivable. Well worth installing in your browser of choice
Stukas had an automatic dive recovery mechanism. If the pilot blacked out, the autopilot would pull the aircraft out of the dive for him. RAF tumbled to the fact that Stuka pilots were still unconcious or dazed just after their dive, and waited for them. The Ju-87B hanging from the ceiling on Chicago's Museum of Science and Industry was captured in North Africa by a British pilot who tailed the Stuka and forced its pilot to surrender right after he came to.
That sound sophisticated for a plane from the 1930s .
@@Crashed131963 "An interesting feature the the Stuka was its automatic pull-out system. Once the bomb had been dropped, the airplane automatically began a 5-6 g recovery. This could save the airplane if the pilot became target-fixated, or blacked out."
@@Crashed131963it was, but it's not like planes were just paper and steel even back then
My grandfather was an SBD tailgunner from 43-45 on USS Enterprise. Wish his stories didn't die with him.
A friend of my Dad's [and my Confirmation Sponsor] was an SBD pilot [2dLt] on Gudalcanal with VMSB-235. He stayed with the Marine Reserve and was a LtCol when he retired...
You didn’t talk to him?
Of course I did, but like many veterans of that war he wouldn't give details.
I just can't help but think of Iron Maidens' Tailgunner.
May your grandfather rest in peace.
I’m the 60s, my Dad began to talk about the B29 and the war but very sparingly. Seeing death at the age of 18 and getting wounded at 19 was not a cup of tea.
Thanks Paul! As an avid WWII aviation buff, videos like this will always get my propeller spinning. I appreciate all that you do, and I mean, all, not just WWII stuff. I heard you’ve not been too well recently. If true, I hope you’re on the mend and feeling better. 🤞🏻👍🏻👍🏻
The Dauntless was state of the art when introduced.
Fabulous commentary Paul. Love the historical perspective on engineering. More please 😊
I like the later modification to the Ju-87 that turned it into a hardcore tank killer. Just another demonstration of the versatility of the design, and creativity of the designers
Also Stanley “Swede” Vejtasa at the Battle of Coral Sea in an SBD Dauntless got in a dogfight!! with five Japanese Zeros, shot down three, evaded the other two until they ran low on fuel and left. He did a lot slip streaming. I don't think his tail gunner did any of the shootdowns, he was just hanging on, while Vejtasa jinked about.
The very sturdy 5G wing spar of Heinneman's design made standing wingtip turns possible. Swede took advantage of this. What's also amazing is that the SBD had only two .50 Cal MGs in the nose and synchronized thru the prop. He charged them head on.
Also why SBDs did not have folding wings.
@@HootOwl513
Yep, he knew he could turn much tighter that the Zero's could because of the SBD's strong wings that were designed to take high G loads from pulling out of dive bombing runs, he just kept forcing them into head on passes where they had no real advantage, actually head on he most likely had an advantage from the SBD's forward facing bullet resistant qualities designed into it for being shot at while dive bombing, while as everyone knows, I'm sure including him at the time, Zero's had virtually no survivability designed into them, something that cost a lot of Japanese pilots their lives.
The story of Swede taking on those Zero's is one of the most legendary naval aviation feats of all time.
I once read that the SBD had a positive kill ratio over the Zero - I'm not sure of the source.
@@garyfasso6223 I highly doubt that the SBD had a positive kill ratio over the Zero. The SBD was designed as a dive bomber. The Zero was a designed as an air superiority fighter. If the Zero ruled the skies in early World War II over Brewster Buffalos, P-40s, P-39s, Spitfires, Hurricanes and only was checked by F4F Wildcats using the correct tactics, there isn't no way that the SBD had a positive kill ratio over the Zero. The SBD wasn't a flying target like the TBD Devastator, but it wasn't the F4F Wildcat either.
@jacqueschouette7474 Your doubt is acknowledged.
Great work as always, Paul! Your videos always have a 100% watch rate with me. Always fascinating!
I do believe you have the best channel on youtube for historical content. I don't know if its just your voice or the amount of detail that you get into but I always find myself hooked on every video that comes out. Thank you for the hard work and here's to many more!
The Dauntless, the name says it all. With a classic profile, she was poetry in motion
A fav model in my collection back in the day, great color scheme.
The Ju 87's principal designer, Hermann Pohlmann, held the opinion that any dive-bomber design needed to be simple and robust. This led to many technical innovations, such as the retractable undercarriage being discarded in favour of one of the Stuka's distinctive features, its fixed and "spatted" undercarriage. (Copied from Wikipedia) Give credit to Wikipedia if you’re going to use it as source for your text!
I think Guderian's contribution to the progress of combined arms warfare was largely created as self-promotion after the fact.
It was not. He was the chief architect of Germany's phenomenal offensives in 1939-1941.
I think you have one of the best voices for the delivery of information on the TH-cam 🎉
What a terrific perspective on two important aircraft. Really excellent analysis. In addition, I am also subscribed to Ground News and endorse your views on it's utility. Top video, again!
Correction:
Guderian was NOT the architect of german armored tactics. That has been a common belive for a long time, but is debunked some time ago. In fact, Guderian had pretty primitive and old school ideas (even mocking armored vehicles in a period), turning out to be nonfunctional.
But as he managed to survive where many brigther and more effective thinkers died in combat, he framed himself as the mastermind of all german armored concepts to make a a comfy seat in the Nazi power structures.
I'm sorry that i can only offer geman sources for th etopic, but for completion:
th-cam.com/video/dZlQyA2ujS0/w-d-xo.html
Flugzeug (lit. "flight gear"; aero-/airplane) = FLUKE-TSOYK (approx. pronunciation in English)
Great video as always, Lord Varys
Great video, thank you Mr. Shiilito.
Greetings,
Anthony
I think history now shows that Stukas are much more successful at killing tanks in video games than they ever were in real life.
This was a really technical video .. what can not be seen is the actual sizes of these airframes.. both the SBD and TBM are very large airframes when compared to the ju-88.
2 great planes, and a credit to their designers and crews.
Good comparison ! Both airplanes ,their units , and their pilots, made history in military aviation! Loved the video.
Thank you, Paul, for a terrific video on an important but oft-overlooked topic. Great pictures and film clips.
Stuka was not a very good tank killer. In fact, it wasn't one at all. This is just a myth. The Ju-87's contribution to the destruction of Soviet armour, or armour in general, was less than negligible. Only about 3% of Soviet armour (mostly open SPGs and reconnaissance tanks) was destroyed by air strikes of any kind, including horizontal area bombardment. This figure speaks for itself. It was practically impossible for a dive bomber to intentionally hit a tank, as a tank-sized object was too difficult for the pilot to spot from the height from which a Stuka in a dive must have already dropped its bombs. It must be added that only a direct hit on the medium or heavy tank or, (in the case of a 500 kg bomb) on its close surroundings counted at a distance of a few metres, could have neutralised it. Moreover, any tactically viable attempt to kill a tank with an aircraft gun of any type and calibre was, for the same reason, a waste of time and resources. There is no need to mention that the infamous Rudel's successes in this field were an almost complete fraud pumped up by Goebbelsian propaganda.
No 2. world war airplane was a very successful tank killer. They were indirectly successful by killing their fuel supply. I knew a German tanker from WW II. I asked him what he did when attacked by airplanes: „ close the hatch“
@theonlymadmac4771 Yes soft targets were wulnerable to airstrike. Cutting supply lines however were equally bad for armor as well as for infantry units or submarine bases. There were no efficient tank killing airplanes durins wwII. Not with that era airframes and engines. The soviet 37mm NS cannon's first proper platform was MiG-15
Thank you Curious Droid! For anyone interested in staying fully informed, check out the link above.
It’s crazy that in a dive, the Stuka and JU-88 were on autopilot and would pull themselves out of the dive.
Paul's shirt game stays unmatched. Thanks for another great video, Paul!
That's a formidable shirt you are wearing!
Flown by Eric Brown - were there many aircraft that Eric Brown didn't get a chance to assess?
At 12:32 the narration says that 54 Val dive bombers carried 550 bombs that weighed 250 kilograms each. That’s breaks down to over 5,000 lbs of bombs per plane and cannot be correct.
They where kinda the first dedicated precision strike Bombers & having that Scalpel to get rid of Obstacles, sure is a Game changer!
Excellent video on a lessor discussed subject.
Your thoroughness deserve many more subscribers
Personally think that some the Douglas TBD Devastator's torpedoes actually hit there target but did not detonate there warheads.
There was a problem with the firing pin on the torpedoes being very weak so they hit target but did not explode. Can anyone confirm if this was the problem in this battle. The Americans eventually fixed the problem but it took a long time before someone put in the effort to identify why the torpedoes were not exploding
I'm glad you know the difference between a Dauntless and an Avenger, unlike a certain other channel....
Loved the videos, love the story telling... but especially love the Batik collections you have!
Very good video! Although not a dive bomber, you could add the Fairey Swordfish to the story. Though heavily outdated, it accounted for the sinking of the French Vichy fleet, the Italian fleet, it disabled the Bismarck... so not much of an airplane, but what an execellent state of service!
Ed Heineman went on to create the A-4 Skyhawk jet in the 50s, nicknamed "Heineman's Hotrod".
I must be paranoid...my brother and I were talking about a comparison of the Douglas SBD and the Stuka just the other day..I think my Hey Google is listening to me..Excellent video.
Let's not forget the Japanese contribution to dive bombers, the Aichi D3A Type 99. It's allied code name was Val.
It was mentioned.
@@garyfasso6223 A very tiny, tiny mention compared to the other two airplanes. Cheers!
Excellent - a lot of footage I've never seen before.
Great video as usual!
As always, very entertaining and informative. I will make sure to include my new knowledge for my next purchase ;)
As a German, may I recommend using a native text to speech thinggie to get the pronunciation right for the perfect video? (If you already do: sorry. I know, German is hard.)
Cheers!
Hans Guderian, in his book, " Achtung, Panzer", cited the Australian Battle of Hamel as the model for the combined arms tactics, misnamed " Blitzkreig" and really a development of earlier envelopment battles of the Prussians, that he was proposing for the German Army. Devised and meticulously planned by the Australian Lt General John Monash. Montgomery, in his " History of Warfare", stated the Monash was, "... the best general on the western front in Europe..", the military innovator who gavevthecworld modern Warfare in combined arms operations, not the Royal Flying Corps.
We all know information is good, it’s key to knowing who we are, what we are and where we came from. However, happy is better! Progress, inspiration, the betterment of the shite that came before, please!!
Best shirts ever. Seriously!
Stuka didn't often provide close air support for ground units, especially not during the 1939-1940 years as the co-ordination between ground units and the Luftwaffe was near non existant. One 1939 testimony said they could call in air support, but it would take place the next day in the morning as the planes were "busy". In France, the Panzer divisions moved so quickly that there was no time to co-ordinate and during Barbarossa the Stukas were largely concentrated on large targets like airfields, trainyards, tankyards etc. It's a bit of a myth that they provided close air support for the troops and tanks, they did but it was not it's primary mission.
Funny thing about Cambrai in 1917; a British court of enquiry named German ground attack aircraft as a major contributing factor to the success of the German counter attack that so completely reversed the gains of the British armoured forces that that Chefkraft later salvaged and re-used about fifty out of the one hundred and eighty Mk.IV tanks lost by the British Army at Cambrai with about thirty of them being made operational again.
Excellent as always
Fantastic video! And a very interesting topic!
Many thanks for this great show. WHY do I see so many images of SBD's diving on IJN carriers from an angle to the carrier's centerline (length wise) ? I woud assume that diving from the stern of the target lining up on to its center line, towards the target's bow would give a dive bomber pilot much more chance to correct for wind and for evasive actions by the ships ? Also, I did not see many images showing SBD's making a "shoulder roll" just before entering the dive, although such roll would be the preferred way ? This opposed to Stuka bombers often seen rolling over the shoulder.
I loved that, awesome job 😍
Very good.
Thanks for posting
Thanks Mr. Droid.
always informative and entertaining. never really thought much about dive bombers now i is more educated.
Amazing video! Thank you!
Great video, Paul...👍
And now they are immortalized in movies that we know so well.
I always wondered what happened to Matt Pinfield after MTV’s 120 Minutes, and I’m so stoked that he can nerd out about SBDs & Ju-87s as much as he can about The Pixies & Sonic Youth.
I have always wonder how it would feel as gunner to fall down sitting backwards in dive.
Why didn't the Fleet Air arm use the SBD especially early before the Barracuda entered service ?
Where do you get your Shirts from? They are always colourful, with great designs.
That was actually only the war in Europe. In Asia the first bombs to be dropped were in 1937 by the Japanese in the battle of Shanghai unless there was an incident earlier with against China, or you count the Italian invasion of Abyssinia.
Nice mention of the Japanese Val.
Rediscovered Curious Droid recently …. Task & Purpose, Mark Felton, History Chap, History Guy, Garand Thumb, Dark Tech, Yarn Hub, Dark Skies … watch this channel and take a refresher. As for Forgotten Weapons, Military Aviation History, Binkov, Brent 0331 and even The Fat Electrician - you’re all in fine company with Curious Droid.
Thanks Paul🇺🇸
The real question no one is asking, where do you get those marvelous shirts?
4:04 No Ground left.
How did the Stuka "alter" the course of WW2 when it started at the beginning.
I love your stuff, but good god! Four minutes of BS until a 16 minute video starts. You’re killing me, Smalls. You’re killing me.
Fast forward will chase your woes away.
After their infamous attack on RAF Tangmere, practically all of the attacking Stukas were wiped out by the bases Hurricanes
Love the video as alway. The name Red Baron is not a name or title ever used for Richthofen. The name is not seen in history until used by snoopy from the cartoon peanuts in 1965
I remember it being used for Richthoven in the early 70s (non-ironically AFAIK) so if you are right, the myth was well established by that time.
Good vid, but I wish there had been an explanation of how the dive brakes worked.
Whatup Techno Varys
True Right
I guess if the Germans were into Aircraft Carriers they already had a dive bomber for them .
I would advise your viewers to look into the incredible career of Stuka pilot Maj. Hans-Ulrich Rudel. Hollywood will never make his movie because of his politics, but it would be the best adventure/war story ever told if they did.
The Stuka dive bomber was outdated like the American a10 warthog is
But they could both be used to incredibly deadly effect when used with the right strategies
Twas good. Ta muchly
Also... noice shirt
great vid
it was called bewegungskrieg, blitz krieg was a basterdization of the original term by newspapers of the time (im not 100% sure on the last part )
Learn something new every day
The problem at the Battle of Midway was not that the US torpedo bomber pilots were ineffectivevbutbrather that there torpedos were useless.
I like the channel but 20% of the run time as ads, not so much.
Have to wonder how much that large unretractable landing gear slowed down the Stuka in level flight and fuel consumption ..
Aye some more great content 👌
It isn't unusual for a group to social engineer whether biologically programmed or by choice, another group to go commit violence with the mind of securing themselves as well as the whole. Thousands of species do this. Humans are simply the most destructive going about it.
but we are the only species with a mind in the sense you used???
When speaking of brilliant aeronautical engineers Ed Heinemann doesn't get the attention he deserves.
Midway was decided by so many factors including incredible luck but none of them were the qualities of the Dauntless. Could have been any other dive bomber. And the entire squadron could have been wiped out like the torpedo bombers before them if the japanese carriers would have decided to launch fighters instead of another wave of their own bombers. That battle could have gone either way and any other air plane could have gotten the kills and fame. It's true, though, that the era of battleships was over.
Most of your into was ad,surly you can cut that down?.
It is amazing how these types of airplanes are always dismissed as "Slow, "Obsolete", "Vulnerable" by most planners and then they go on to great success. Those same people dismiss the results as a fluke, explaining if we'd had only had more modern, sleeker equipment, the results would have obviously been better. Yes, they were/are vulnerable in situations, but the bottom line is that the mission, when they were used correctly, was vital and pivotal to the outcome. The 'expert' people at the top or 'behind the scenes' are always quick to point out that vulnerability but if you ask the real heroes, the pilots and maintenance guys that flew these aircraft, they'd do it all over again as they knew it was 'getting the job done' The A-10 is a prime example of this situation in relatively modern times. 'Experts' are really quick to point out that the ground support mission is too dangerous and we should protect people on the ground from 30,000 feet with 5 or 6 Small Diameter Bombs (one bad guy on a motorcycle per bomb?) , as that is the best way to protect those valuable assets like pilots and airframes. I guarantee if you ask those A-10 pilots, the ones that signed up twice for a mission, they would be more focused on the guys in the trenches, the ones that will hold the ground necessary to shorten the conflict in the end.
"Meshsheshmit" good Lord
How many fighters were shot down by each of these dive bombers?
I know that the SBD was resonsible for quite a few (see Swede Vejtasa) but I have never heard about 87's claiming air victories. Stukas were great - unless they were up against a peer. Polish houses can't fight back. They sank 10 Russian ships - the entire war? That's an afternoon over Rabaul for a single carrier squadron of SBD's. 87's sank a lot of shipping. SBD's sank a lot of warships (and shipping) including 4 aircraft carriers.
Comparing the two is just being polite to fans of German equipment.
No comparison.
Ed Heinemann, we are NOT worthy!
Shirt !
I'm not sure if the Stuka was capable of hitting a moving tank but when they attached large caliber cannons to the wings, it chewed up a lot with that. I say that because if it was hard for the Dauntless to hit a moving aircraft carrier then how is the Stuka capable getting a bullseye on a tank.
With a 550 lb Stuka bomb you don't need a bullseye - the German SC250 bomb, depending on the fuze & type of ground will make a 30 ft crater 12 ft deep! Note that the blast radius is huge & a tank is no protection against blast concussion effects plus lungs/eyes/ears effects - killing the crew with no apparent tank damage was quite common, & survivors were useless anyway. Also such a bomb near miss will overturn the heaviest of tanks. Also over-reporting German tank "kills" was normal even among honest aircrew - aircrew are usually too busy staying alive to closely observe hits. Unlike in say DCS & the movies, ground visibility is marginal after a Stuka attack. War stories are exactly that - just war stories.
@@nightjarflying Thank you for that reply. I hadn't considered the near miss damage.
I often look back with astonishment just how Japanese naval power was effectively smashed in a matter of minutes, it almost defies belieif.
All hail the algorithm 👍👍👍
Erh...They weren't the first 'DIVERS' ever?
The Stuka was always intended as the army's heavy artillery. Other armies only did that as a 'paper' exercise,....except maybe the Soviet 'sturmovch ground effects bomber.
No way the Stuka was ever intended as a fighter-bomber. A beast under air superiority , never a go it alone type.++ Yes I knew about the auto-level feature, but TY for bringing it up....very cool feature at the time.